Effectiveness of lead-hazard control interventions on dust lead loadings: Findings from the evaluation of the HUD Lead-Based Paint Hazard Control Grant Program

From 1994 to 1999, the Evaluation of the US Department of Housing and Urban Development Lead-Based Paint Hazard Control Grant Program studied the intervention experiences of over 2800 homes in 11 states in the USA. Each interior intervention was categorized as (in order of increasing intensity) (a) cleaning/spot painting; (b) complete repainting; (c) complete repainting plus window treatments; (d) window abatement plus treatments to other components; (e) abatement of all lead-based paint hazards; or (f) abatement of all lead-based paint. Complete dust testing and environmental data were available for 1034 and 278 dwellings through 12 and 36 months postintervention, respectively. Strategies ranging from complete repainting to window abatement plus other treatments reduced geometric mean preintervention windowsill and floor dust lead loadings up to 36 months postintervention (reductions for complete repainting, from 16 to 5 μg/ft2 on floors and 182 to 88 μg/ft2 on sills; for window abatement plus other treatments, 27–8 μg/ft2 on floors and 570–124 μg/ft2 on sills). Full abatement reduced windowsill and floor loadings from baseline to 12 months postintervention [95–6 μg/ft2 on floors and 518–30 μg/ft2 on sills (data were not available for this strategy at 36 months)]. Window lead-hazard abatement was the most effective measure to reduce dust lead loadings on windows, but this treatment would need to be performed in conjunction with treatments to floors as well as exterior and soil treatments for the most effective control of dust lead on floors.